TheFBI is supposed to have great people that work there, but are they being given the proper background checks? As a matter of fact, how many other agencies such as but not limited to the CIA, Justice Department, National Security, Homeland Security and the list goes on, have employees that were not properly cleared? Is there any evidence that some who are to uphold our laws and ensure our safety do not qualify to do so? Are those taking the oath to uphold our Constitution not properly being vetted?

These are very serious questions and according to one man, former FBI agent Michael F. McMahon, they are not!

Our lives, our cities, and our safety depends on the proper vetting of those who wish to work for our government that is supposed to do just that, vet.

take our poll - story continues below

Will you vote for President Trump in 2020 if he can’t get the wall built?

Will you vote for President Trump in 2020 if he can’t get the wall built?

Will you vote for President Trump in 2020 if he can’t get the wall built?*

Yes.

No.

Yes, it's the Democrats fault.

Email*

Comments

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Completing this poll grants you access to Freedom Outpost updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

According to McMahon, they are not and it began back in 2008 and may still be going on.

This is very troublesome at best and has to make one wonder if proper background checks were not made, how many of the terrorists we wish to stop may now be within these agencies due to improper background checks, all for the simple feat of clearing them within a specific amount of time.

Mr. Michael F. McMahon stated:

“The FBI is the bellwether of background checks, name checks, vetting. How the FBI operates, others follow suit. Were the FBI to have halted the "quantity over quality" name checks culture and disclosed to the public / other intelligence agencies / contractor research agencies (ie: USIS) AND held those responsible for their respective actions AND inactions, I believe firmly the Riverside killing, Snowden, Manning, Navy Yard killing, etc.. may never had occurred. THE KEY is to hold those accountable, criminally or otherwise, for their respective actions / inactions. If the FBI had done the aforementioned in 2008 / 2009, do you think those who "fast-tracked", "cut-corners" on background checks / name checks would have done so.......KNOWING that they would face criminal charges? NO. This "culture" has been going on for countless years.......... This is another reason I champion the Excepted services Whistleblower Protections legislation. I took an oath, and I always keep my oaths. I cannot be bought.”

Mr. McMahon had an excellent service while he was a US Navy Lieutenant and received several Navy Achievement Medals.

“For professional achievement while serving as Intelligence watch officer and special Intelligence Communications Officer on the Staff of Commander In Chief, U.S.Naval Forces, Europe, From June 1992 to 1994. … Lieutenant McMahon’s excellent accomplishments were a direct result of his superb leadership, tireless efforts, and total devotion to duty. They reflected great credit upon himself, his command, and were in keeping with the highest traditions of the United States Naval Service.”

The above is an example of Mr. McMahon’s background and shows his willingness to do what is right. Below we will show why the FBI may well be in the position it is now due to the lack of proper leadership and proper vetting.

We have shortened McMahon's FBI Whistleblower complaint filed after he was discharged from the FBI for informing them about improper “name checks” of applicants for government work.

“In May 2008, Mr. McMahon began his employment with the FBI as a Research Analyst Team Captain (GS-13). In this capacity, he was responsible for ensuring that the name check cases were properly researched, closed, and disseminated to the Office of Personnel Management (OPM). Beginning in September 2008, Mr. McMahon began noting that many open cases were being taken out of the Research Analysts’ case queues by the dayshift “Red Team” and being improperly closed. This practice allowed for quick closure of the cases and raised performance indicators. However, the cases that were improperly closed lacked information necessary to correctly analyze the case. This practice was a result of the emphasis placed on quantity instead of quality, as it allowed Research Analysts agents to close cases quickly, albeit without the necessary information or analysis.

After these cases were closed, the original Research Analysts assigned to research these cases on the case began receiving information that they had previously requested from the Field Offices on the cases that were closed by the Red Team. This information often impacted the analysis and yielded different results from that of the Red Team, which had been reported to OPM. Mr. McMahon brought this improper practice and disparate results to the attention of his supervisor, (GS-14), who reported the matter to the Unit Chief (GS-15). Despite this effort, the improper closing practices of the Red Team continued.

In hopes of ending this practice, Mr. McMahon applied for and was promoted to the position of nightshift Unit Chief at the OPM desk. After obtaining this position, Mr. McMahon instructed the Research Analysts working under him to follow the proper name-checking procedures. However, the unethical and illegal practices of the Red Team continued to undermine his efforts. Mr. McMahon then attempted to address the issue with the dayshift Unit Chief , but she failed to acknowledge the problem or take any corrective action. In fact, the day shift unit chief stated to Mr. McMahon that she kept copies of certain emails at her home “just in case.” Mr. McMahon then reported the problematic practices to his supervisor, the Assistant Section Chief, on four occasions. Again, Mr. McMahon’s serious concerns were ignored.

Instead, the Assistant Section Chief decided to remove the case closing process from Mr. McMahon’s control. The Assistant Section Chief placed a low-level Research Analyst in Mr. McMahon’s Unit to control the case closing process and to ensure that cases were being processed “expeditiously.” This low-level Research Analyst reported directly to the Assistant Section Chief not to Mr. McMahon. Mr. McMahon continued to oppose and refused to participate in a system that closed cases in violation of procedure and regulation.

It is important to note that many of the affected cases involved counter espionage issues. These cases were being closed purely to meet deadlines. In the rush to obtain high closure numbers, the cases were not being reviewed and approved by the Counter Espionage Unit before the results were reported to OPM, as required.”

This should make any normal individual to ask the question, why are we Not doing a proper background/vetting process for our important positions. If people were to do this in the private business, they would be fired for trying to speed up a process, which could very well allow the wrong type of individuals into the positions that are supposed to protect the people from any sort of violent act. We are going to show some of what Mr. McMahon has stated are why people possibly did kill and divulge secret information.

Mr. McMahon showed the very real possibility that people contracted for the FBI and other agencies were not properly checking the backgrounds of individuals, which in one instance he showed why the Secret Service allowed an armed man with an arrest record to ride the elevator with President Obama! McMahon showed that he believed this might not have happened had a proper “Name Check” process had been followed.

President Obama shared an elevator earlier this month with an armed security contractor who had been arrested before for assault and battery, in the latest report of a serious violation of Secret Service security protocols.

Below is an E-mail Mr. McMahon sent to express his concern for not having the proper “vetting” process being done.

Jim, since you made mention in your previous email of the name check backlog being processed by USCIS-Desk Research Analysts at RMD, did you know I informed upper management that USCIS-Desk Research Analysts (Nightshift) played video games and other hand-held devices routinely while collecting a paycheck and processing this USCIS name check backlog? Also, USCIS-Desk personnel had a movie night with popcorn, etc. Quite the USCIS name check backlog.

Moreover, the Arm's Reach Research Analysts dropped the ball routinely with regard to processing lists of names (sent by Secret Service) via secure fax to investigate. These names to be investigated were of individuals to be in "arm's reach" of POTUS. I brought this to the attention of upper management, too. The solution, they made me in-charge of managing the processing of Arm's Reach Secret Service requests, and this (Arm's Reach) was not even my Desk! I made many suggestions as to how to end this poor management practice of processing Arm's Reach Secret Service requests. The culture at RMD NNCP was appalling to say the very least. Only when I was promoted to Unit Chief, did this Arm's Reach responsibility go to someone else. Incidentally, there was a Bocce Ball tournament field day for the OPM-Desk Dayshift folks, planned and run by the daytime Unit Chief (the same Dayshift Unit Chief who "has emails, paperwork at home, just in-case"). I refused my (Nightshift) Unit to participate.

Another motive to process name checks quickly (quantity trumping quality): OPM paid FBI $35 per name check report. Mr. McMahon’sAssistant Director referred to OPM-Desk as a profitable business unit within FBI, the first of its kind. As you are aware, in fall of 2008, OPM management brought to the attention of RMD that name check results / reports analyzed by FBI NNCP OPM-Desk were horribly inaccurate. The reanalysis / investigation which ensued, "The B Cases", had up to 50% - 60% of cases (out of 1780 approximately) as either falsified, inaccurate or incomplete (Jim, you have notes on this provided to you by me).

Retaliation against me began in earnest as I continued to escalate bringing to upper management's attention, by verbal and email, the NNCP's OPM-Desk's illegal and unethical practices of processing OPM-requested name checks. In short, RMD did not want to lose its golden egg (money from OPM) and its FBI HQ recognition as being a stellar division.

I trust you will share with Representative Issa. I look forward to your thoughts, Jim.

Most sincerely,

Michael McMahon

McMahon believes that the shooter in the Navy yard would not have passed the vetting had it been done properly.

This alone should be brought to the forefront to expose the fact that people are not getting the proper background checks.

Could this have been why the Fort Hood shooter got into the Army?

Could this lack of following proper protocol have consequences we will only find out after another shooting or maybe after our nations best secrets have been given to our enemies?

McMahon tried to show this to be true and his superiors just shrugged it off as the way things were.

Is this the way the FBI is doing things?

Is this why the FBI seems to be more of a political arm of a subversive branch of our government?

We have shown but a very small part of what Mr. McMahon has revealed and hope that this is brought to the top, especially to President Trump, so that perhaps this may be remedied and that we can prosecute those involved.

Don't forget to Like Freedom Outpost on Facebook, Google Plus, & Twitter. You can also get Freedom Outpost delivered to your Amazon Kindle device here.

About the AuthorLeon Puissegur

Leon Puissegur is a Disabled Vietnam Veteran with 3 children and 9
grandchildren. He has been married to the same wonderful lady for 43
years. He is an award winning author and has been writing opinion pieces over the years and in just the
last few years has written 4 books and a large amount of articles on many
sites. You can purchase his books at Amazon. Pick up his latest The Oil Man.

Join the conversation!

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse.